CHANGING ATTITUDES TO
IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEE POLICY IN BOTSWANA

PLEASE NOTE: Readers are welcome to reproduce
and reference
this article as long as appropriate acknowledgments are given.

E

XECUTIVE
SUMMARY

F

or
the last two decades, Botswana has had the reputation as a "country of
immigration," based on the large-scale import of

skilled expatriates from Africa, Asia
and the West. This policy has been accompanied by a general acceptance, and even
openness, on the part of Batswana towards non-citizens. In the late 1990s,
however, these attitudes began to change, with intolerance towards non-citizens
growing in a country where it was unknown only a few years earlier. Against this
background, the University of Botswana mounted the SAMP National Immigration
Policy Survey (NIPS) in Botswana in 2001. This survey delved into two basic
areas: (a) citizen perceptions of immigrants, migrants and refugees groups and
(b) attitudes towards Botswana’s own national immigration policy. The research
is important for a number of practical reasons:

Anecdotal reports of growing
xenophobia need to be systematically assessed through rigorous survey methods.
In other words, how widespread is the reported intolerance and is it more
common amongst some groups?

Assuming that no government wishes
to condone xenophobia, a survey of this nature can provide important insights
into the causes and dimensions of intolerance and assist government in
formulating appropriate responses, including public education campaigns;

A survey of citizen attitudes shows
exactly how well-informed people actually are. Xenophobia is often based on
misinformation and stereotyping. What images do Batswana hold of immigrants,
migrants and refugees? How aware are they of the ideal of refugee protection
and the government’s international human rights commitments?

The survey seeks to provide
government with up-to-date information on the attitudes of citizens towards
current immigration policy and possible future options.

While the actual effects of legal and
unauthorized immigration on Botswana’s economy and society are unknown, this
does not stop Batswana from believing that immigration has negative effects. The
consistency of the responses throughout this survey indicates that Batswana are
becoming less tolerant towards in-migration and displaying an attitude profile
that is increasingly in line with countries such as South Africa and Namibia
which are generally considered to be highly intolerant of outsiders. This is
surprising for a country that has, since independence, adopted one of the most
open policies in the region towards immigration.

Batswana now tend to feel that there
are too many immigrants in the country, that they are losing jobs to foreigners
(although few could cite an instance of this actually happening) and that
foreign citizens were transferring too much money out of the country. The
majority oppose permanent residence for immigrants. On the other hand,
immigrants who bring skills that are in short supply locally or who are willing
to invest and create jobs are still very welcome.

The greatest shift in attitudes is in
favour of much tighter controls over borders and greater internal enforcement. A
very high percentage favour electrification of borders with neighbouring states.
Most also want non-citizens to carry ID’s with them at all times. Employers who
hire people illegally should be prosecuted. At the same time, people feel that
the rights of temporary residents and, especially, unauthorized migrants should
be severely curtailed.

The underlying reason for the growth
in intolerance seems to be related to actual changes in migration patterns to
Botswana. The economic and political problems of Zimbabwe in particular have
clearly led to a significant increase in unauthorized migration to and through
Botswana. The Botswana authorities have become considerably more active in
arresting and deporting unauthorized migrants. Further adding to the public
visibility of the issue, the media and politicians have begun to identify the
presence of "illegal immigrants" as a problem.

Once an "enemy" is identified in this
way, attitudes towards all people from the region and all non-citizens are in
danger of deteriorating, as they have in South Africa. A clear danger is that
people begin to exaggerate the negative, and forget about the positive, impact
of the presence of non-citizens in the country. In South Africa, for example,
people are hostile towards all non-citizens, whether they are in the country
legally or not.

In terms of policy recommendations,
there is no room for complacency. If the Botswana government wants to continue
to pursue its forward- looking policy on immigration, then citizens (and voters)
need to be reminded of why this policy is good for the country in the first
place. Second, it is clear from this survey that people are becoming
increasingly alarmed about the presence of people illegally in the country. In
South Africa, this has resulted in systematic abuses of basic human rights, in
wild exaggerations of the numbers of unauthorized migrants, in stereotyping
about their impacts, and in physical attacks on innocent

people. Botswana presumably does not
want to go down this particular road. There is still time to avoid the descent
into the kind of xenophobia one witnesses in South Africa. But opinion-makers
need to speak up on the issue before it is too late.